Hobbie v. Andrews

• Decision Date: 14 April 1896
• Citation: 111 Ala. 176,19 So. 974
• Parties: HOBBIE ET AL. v. ANDREWS ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

19 So. 974

111 Ala. 176

HOBBIE ET AL. v. ANDREWS ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 14, 1896

Appeal from circuit court, Chambers county; N. D. Denson, Judge.

Action by Hobbie & Teague against J. W. Andrews and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Appeal dismissed.

E. M. Oliver, and Robinson & Duke, for appellants.

Dowdell & Duke, for appellees.

BRICKELL, C.J.

The cause must, in obedience to the rule of practice, be heard and determined on the abstracts, without reference to the transcript, except for the purpose of verifying the statements of the counter abstract. O'Neal v. Simonton (Ala.) 19 So. 8. The abstract of the appellants shows that they "amended their complaint," and, without any statement of what the amendment consisted, merely states, "which as amended is copied in the record." This is not a compliance with the rule. In all civil cases, without the pleadings, or the substance of them, there cannot be an intelligent or just revision of the rulings of the primary court. Whatever may be the nature of the rulings, whether the admission or rejection of evidence is involved, or instructions given or refused, it is obvious that the rulings may be correct under one state of pleading, and erroneous under another or variant state. Unless error is affirmatively shown, it is the duty of the appellate tribunal to affirm the judgment of the primary tribunal. Affirmed.